expression switch vs. procedural switch
forax at univ-mlv.fr
Wed Mar 14 16:16:29 UTC 2018
> De: "Kevin Bourrillion" <kevinb at google.com>
> À: "amber-spec-experts" <amber-spec-experts at openjdk.java.net>
> Envoyé: Mercredi 14 Mars 2018 16:55:24
> Objet: Re: expression switch vs. procedural switch
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Kevin Bourrillion < [ mailto:kevinb at google.com
> | kevinb at google.com ] > wrote:
>> The more I have thought about it, the more I believe that 95% of the entire
>> value of expression switch is that it isn't procedural switch , and is easier
>> to reason about than procedural switch because of all things it can't do:
>> * can't miss cases
>> * can't return
>> * can't break/continue a containing construct
>> * can't fall through
>> * (for constants or other disjoint patterns) can't depend on the order of cases.
>> As far as I can tell, its limitations are exactly what make it useful.
> Brian reminded me in the other thread that as long as we voluntarily stick to
> `->` style for all cases, we get all of this. So, from my perspective, if we
> just adopt a style rule for Google Style that when using switch in an
> expression context one should stick to `->`, I might have basically what I
yes, but it's what i detest the most about C++, everyone has its own dialect.
More information about the amber-spec-observers